|
Originally Posted by Buck Rogers
(Post 3583614)
You lost me! You say it would make no difference to UAL pilots.....then you acknowledge that DC on PS would amount to 1%
A. 7% of annual earnings as cash OR B. 6% of annual earnings as cash and 1% in 401k (since 16% DC on 6% earnings = ~1% of earnings) I would rather have the the first option. |
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 3583645)
In other words, we could either get:
7% of annual earnings as cash OR 6% of annual earnings as cash and 1% in 401k I would rather have the first option. Understood. But, as has been pointed out, changing the PS formula for all employees might be tough to do. Getting a DC on top of the PS (Delta match at 18% DC) is comparably much easier. Ensure you get the pattern bargaining Delta match as a minimum. You guys have a lot of nuggets to get a Delta match on. Somebody alluded to this before, but here is a link to an article by a Delta pilot/author. If anyone wants to take their negotiations seriously, it's worth a six minute read....just in case you get a phone poll.... https://pilotmathtreasurebath.com/20...-just-one/amp/ BTW....and get NAVBLUE bidding and DC on PS:) |
Originally Posted by iahflyr
(Post 3583645)
In other words, we could either get:
A. 7% of annual earnings as cash OR B. 6% of annual earnings as cash and 1% in 401k (since 16% DC on 6% earnings = ~1% of earnings) I would rather have the the first option. |
The ask is 10.5b. You heard it here first.
|
Originally Posted by elmetal
(Post 3583545)
If we're talking about switching PBS bidding software (not vacation bidding or anything else which is what the OP was talking about), then Navblue wins hands down. Anyone who's used Navblue would undoubtedly agree.
|
Originally Posted by togaflaps
(Post 3587590)
My regional and LCC used navblue too. I wish we had it here, badly.
|
Originally Posted by dailyops
(Post 3583572)
"After many years of SSC pursuit, including looking at every PBS vendor, and their programing and ability to optimize, the decision was made to develop our own new interface unlike anything that exists in the market today."
|
The thing I hate most with our pbs system is that you can only Award Pairings with a single layover per line. So if you see an awesome 3 day trip with layovers in A and B that you really want, you have to either preference laying over in A over B or B over A. The system will then award you a trip with Layover A and then EWR, instead of layover B that you wanted. My only recourse is going through the bid packets, finding the individual trip numbers, and then awarding that specific pairing before any of my preferences in PBS. So then I have like 20-30 lines of individuals trips I want. OH and then on the 10th they update all the trips in the packet and you have to go through ALL OF THEM to make sure the company didn't change a pairing number.
Navblue was the best. |
10.5 B cost to UAL ( many improvements not only pay rates)
4 years CBA 18/ 5/5/5% 2023/24/25/26 retro 14/5/5/18% 2019/20/21/22 and partial of 2023 |
Originally Posted by BirdOn
(Post 3587981)
The thing I hate most with our pbs system is that you can only Award Pairings with a single layover per line. So if you see an awesome 3 day trip with layovers in A and B that you really want, you have to either preference laying over in A over B or B over A. The system will then award you a trip with Layover A and then EWR, instead of layover B that you wanted. My only recourse is going through the bid packets, finding the individual trip numbers, and then awarding that specific pairing before any of my preferences in PBS. So then I have like 20-30 lines of individuals trips I want. OH and then on the 10th they update all the trips in the packet and you have to go through ALL OF THEM to make sure the company didn't change a pairing number.
Navblue was the best. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:26 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands